Friday, August 24, 2007

Recently pop
singer Gwen Stefani made news by making what she referred to as a
“major sacrifice” by performing her concert in Malaysia with shoulders,
legs and belly completely covered. The reason for ditching her usual
attire, which often consists of short skirts and midriff-revealing
halter tops, was in reaction to protests from the 10,000-member
National Union of Malaysian Muslim Students who said such clothing
would clash with Islamic culture and values and provide a poor role
model for Malaysian youth. The revealing costumes routinely worn by
Stefani and other performers are not only found offensive by Muslims.
There are many Jewish, Christian and other religions and cultures that
discourage immodest clothing, too. Some groups representing those
religions have even complained in the past about the bad example being
set for girls and young women by so many in the entertainment industry.

So why would Stefani respond to the protests from a Muslim group, while
ignoring similar complaints from Christian and other groups? About 60
percent of Malaysia's population is Muslim, while those in the United
States identifying themselves as Christian is over 75 percent. The
reason Stefani would bow to Muslims protesting her dress therefore
could not be about numbers.

Saturday, August 18, 2007

My reaction to Goodman-like complaining is: It's 2007, you live in the
United States. You have a pen, phone and Internet connection. Stop
whining. It's unattractive. If you want to have an impact, just work.
That's how the guys do it. That's how we gals do it.

Saturday, August 11, 2007

I love Merv Griffin. I used to watch his talk show as a kid and have enjoyed his game shows in the years since, but mostly just love they guy's spirit. This report says he is in grave condition as a result of a recurrence of prostate cancer.

Monday, August 06, 2007

I know it is not likely they will take it, but I offer a little
advice for congressional Democrats in my most recent column at Townhall.

If congressional Democrats seem a little hysterical these days, it just might be due to news that the surge counteroffensive in Iraq is yielding some progress.
...
For many months we heard that the war in Iraq was a huge failure with
the evidence cited including that parts of the country were being taken
over by terrorists, that there was increasing violence between
different factions within the country, that the Iraqi police and
military were not stepping up and were not being trained quickly
enough, and that there was lessening support across the country for the
mission of coalition and Iraqi forces.

Now that it appears progress is being made on many of those fronts,
with much of the credit going to efforts of the surge counteroffensive,
the focus is being shifted to the national political arena in Iraq,
which has not experienced the same progress that is being seen on the
local level. There is little praise to be heard from most Democrats for
the progress that has been made - only talk about the areas in which
the same progress is not being realized.
...
I will offer the following advice to Democrats in Congress knowing it
is unlikely that they will accept it: Instead of ignoring, or worse
denigrating, every word of progress our forces have worked to
accomplish in Iraq, acknowledge that progress and celebrate it. You can
still point out the areas in which progress is lacking. Just be honest
about the good news there is to report.

If our mission in Iraq were to ultimately be deemed a success,
everyone would know that most Democrats had been wrong to want to
abandon the mission. But if Democrats would actually start celebrating
our victories, maybe the majority of the public would forget that for a
time they appeared to be actively working for defeat. Just maybe if
Democrats in Congress would begin working to ensure that the progress
that is being made in Iraq is built upon and encouraged, rather than
belittled and abandoned and defunded, they would be able to share the
credit for any resulting success.

If Democrats decided
to encourage and support the things in Iraq that are going right,
rather than trying to reverse them, even if the the ultimate mission
was eventually deemed a failure they would not be blamed because they
would have only supported the actions that were producing results. It
seems like a win-win for me. Good for Dems and good for America. Click here to read it all.

When
Sergeant David D. Aguina stepped up to the microphone at the YearlyKos
forum on the panel on "The Military and Progressives: Are they that
Different?" and began to quietly rebut many of the points that had been
made about the failure of "The Surge," he knew he wouldn't have an easy
time of it. That is why he prepared a four-inch thick loose leaf binder
full of charts, graphs, releases from the Department of Defense, the
State Department, and Central Command, as well as articles from the
mainstream media.

But for all his preparation, he was still taken by surprise when
one of the panelists, John Soltz, founder of the anti-war group
Votevets.Org, took him to task and silenced him on the grounds that
Aguina was wearing his uniform while expressing his political opinions.

"Technically, he was right," Aguina concedes. "He is a commissioned
officer in the army and I follow the rules. I will respect his
authority which is why today, I came in civilian uniform."

Aguina spoke to Pajamas Media on Saturday, returning to YearlyKos
the day after he was led away from the panel by Soltz, now blending
into the crowd in a charcoal gray suit with a white shirt and a black
tie.

Despite his change of wardrobe, he remains boiling mad at Solz for
angrily chastising him in public for violating military regulations. If
he wants to get technical about it, Aguina counters, two can play at
that game.

"If I'm in violation of AR670-1 which is the regulation he brought
up, then he's in violation of the Uniform Code of Military Justice
Article 88 which says no commissioned officer can criticize a
government official."